Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] lock without a key

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: fred burlingame <tensorpath AT gmail.com>
  • To: Kevin Riley <klriley AT alphalink.com.au>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] lock without a key
  • Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 22:48:54 -0500

Hello Kevin:

Thanks for your comments.

You are correct. I can only speak for myself. But by the same token, I would
assume that most people don't pick up a copy of the masoretic text for a
little light and diversionary reading ... similar, say, to reading the local
newspaper or watching television.

I would also assume that most people who take the time to read this ancient
hebrew text, do so with care and concentration, both now .... and then. That
being said, it seems reasonable to propose that when the consumer of the
masoretic text experiences a single hebrew word used twice in close
proximity, in different contexts, ... that fact would provoke the consumer
to consider the varied meanings of the word ... in both contexts.

Everyone can see the monumental differences in form between ancient hebrew
and a modern english translation. I don't see why the "berlin wall" of
resistance suddenly rises up out of the ground when someone suggests big
differences in substance between the ancient hebrew and its english
translations.

regards,

fred burlingame


On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 9:58 PM, Kevin Riley <klriley AT alphalink.com.au>wrote:

> Are you sure the Hebrew speaker 'thinks' alternative meanings? I know as
> an English speaker that alternative meanings that don't fit the contexts
> don't get consciously thought of.
>
>
> On 3/11/2010 1:39 PM, fred burlingame wrote:
>
>> Paul:
>>
>> I hear what you both say, but it appears to me, that a big difference
>> exists
>> between the hebrew and its english translation.
>>
>> a. When the consumer of the hebrew language hears the word "ha-yil" he
>> thinks "army" or "tangible property" as potential meanings of "ha-yil" (in
>> the context of numbers 31:9,14).
>>
>> b. When the consumer of the english language hears the word "army" he
>> doesn't think "tangible property" as a potential meaning of "army" or vice
>> versa (in the context of these two verses).
>>
>> Biblical hebrew language does not surpass or defer to modern english
>> language. But the two languages simply become susceptible of but
>> approximate
>> translation between the two.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> fred burlingame
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 5:23 PM, Paul Zellmer<pzellmer AT sc.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>> Fred,
>>>
>>> To echo Dr. Vance's note, had you looked up the TWOT article to which I
>>> referred you, you would have found exactly this explanation. The word
>>> also
>>> has a number of other idiomatic usages, all tied together with the root
>>> concept of power.
>>>
>>> Paul Zellmer
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:
>>> b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Donald Vance
>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 4:31 PM
>>> To: fred burlingame
>>> Cc: B-Hebrew
>>> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] lock without a key
>>>
>>> Your premise is mistaken. The meanings ARE related. Hayil has the basic
>>> meaning of "power" in Classical Hebrew. It can be power that derives from
>>> having an army or the power that derives from having wealth, or the power
>>> that derives from strength of character.
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> Donald R. Vance
>>> Professor of Biblical Languages and Literature
>>> Oral Roberts University
>>> donaldrvance AT mac.com
>>>
>>> On Nov 2, 2010, at 2:22 PM, fred burlingame<tensorpath AT gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Matt:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your comments.
>>>>
>>>> I accept the mainstream translations (nkjv, niv, nasb) of numbers
>>>> 31:9,14
>>>>
>>> as
>>>
>>>> the best possible english translations. I probably would also accept as
>>>> excellent, any english translation that you or any other reasonable
>>>>
>>> person
>>>
>>>> might propose. It doesn't matter which translation we choose. Why?
>>>>
>>>> Because the english translation must select one english word for usage
>>>> in
>>>> one verse ("goods") and another unrelated and disconnected english word
>>>> ("army") in the other verse.
>>>>
>>>> The hebrew language original however, employs the identical hebrew word
>>>>
>>> חיל
>>>
>>>> in both locations. And this hebrew noun obviously, closely resembles
>>>> and relates to its parent hebrew verb חיל , meaning to twist or dance.
>>>>
>>>> The consumer of the hebrew text twice experiences, three related
>>>> meanings
>>>>
>>> of
>>>
>>>> one hebrew word חיל . The consumer of the hebrew text further observes
>>>> a
>>>> connexity between verses 9 and 14, due to repetitive usage of the word.
>>>>
>>>> The consumer of the english text however, sees only independence, where
>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>> hebrew reader instead observes relationship and pregnancy of meaning.
>>>>
>>>> The chronic repetition of this circumstance across the masoretic text
>>>> and
>>>> with other hebrew words, effectively locks the text to translation. Yes,
>>>> translation occurs frequently from the hebrew. But the hebrew original
>>>> resembles other language translation only as apples mirror oranges.
>>>>
>>>> regards,
>>>>
>>>> fred burlingame
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 9:15 AM, pastormattfbcrankin<
>>>> pastormattfbcrankin AT gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello Fred,
>>>>>
>>>>> What exactly is the "richness of these connections" that you are
>>>>>
>>>> referring
>>>
>>>> to here? How is it that the Hebrew reader has a completely different
>>>>> understanding that the English or Greek reader? I'm afraid I don't
>>>>>
>>>> follow,
>>>
>>>> please enlighten me. Futhermore, how would you translate these verses
>>>>>
>>>> that
>>>
>>>> would differ so greatly from how it is currently translated?
>>>>>
>>>>> My Hebrew prof in college once said, "Every translation is a betrayal
>>>>> of
>>>>> the text." This is true to a degree, but that being said it doesn't
>>>>>
>>>> mean
>>>
>>>> that the language is locked i.e. indecipherable into another language.
>>>>>
>>>> We
>>>
>>>> will lose certain nuances, but I suspect you are trying to say that we
>>>>>
>>>> lose
>>>
>>>> far more than that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Warmest Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> -Matt Williams
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 1, 2010, at 9:28 PM, fred burlingame wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello Paul:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree with your comments.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would observe however, that in this particular case, we have:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> a. a parent hebrew verb with a meaning to bore or pierce;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> b. a child hebrew noun with two alternate meanings of wealth/goods and
>>>>>>
>>>>> army;
>>>>>
>>>>>> c. and such two noun definitions used in two verses of close physical
>>>>>>
>>>>> and
>>>
>>>> subject matter proximity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The richness of these connections gives the hebrew reading consumer of
>>>>>>
>>>>> the
>>>>>
>>>>>> verses an entirely different understanding, than the disconnected
>>>>>>
>>>>> english
>>>
>>>> words reveal to the english reading consumer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Much of the hebrew meaning survives translation, not. Hence, the
>>>>>> hebrew
>>>>>> language appears locked to english or greek or any other language
>>>>>> translation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> fred burlingame
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Paul Zellmer<pzellmer AT sc.rr.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Fred,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (TWOT) has a good
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> article
>>>
>>>> explaining the relationships of the various usages of the word.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Basically,
>>>>>
>>>>>> both of the cases here would be considered idiomatic in the field of
>>>>>>> translation. When translating idioms, one needs to almost always
>>>>>>> find
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> the
>>>>>
>>>>>> underlying meaning behind the idiom as opposed to the actual words
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> used
>>>
>>>> and
>>>>>
>>>>>> translate that concept. This is because a direct, literal translation
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> of
>>>>>
>>>>>> the idiom from one language to another yields either zero meaning or
>>>>>>> incorrect meaning.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is not just true in translating Hebrew to English--it is the
>>>>>>> case
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> when
>>>>>
>>>>>> you go from any language to another. It is especially true if the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> languages
>>>>>
>>>>>> are not closely related.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Paul Zellmer
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:
>>>>>>> b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of fred burlingame
>>>>>>> Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2010 5:06 PM
>>>>>>> To: B-Hebrew
>>>>>>> Subject: [b-hebrew] lock without a key
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello all:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> a little arithmetic.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1 = 2; or 2 = 2
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Biblical hebrew ("BH") language enjoys a unique characteristic. The
>>>>>>> language
>>>>>>> frequently employs a single word, twice or more, in physical
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> proximity.
>>>
>>>> The single word however, denotes a different meaning in each location.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Translations capture the different meanings of the single word, but
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> lose
>>>
>>>> the
>>>>>>> connexity of the verses, and the depth of the single hebrew word in
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> the
>>>
>>>> process. Witness: חיל :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> וישבו בני ישראל נשי מדין ואת טפם ואת כל בהמתם ואת כל מקנהם ואת כל
>>>>>>> חילם
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> בזזו
>>>>>
>>>>>> numbers 31:9
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ויקצף משה על פקודי החיל שרי האלפים ושרי המאות הבאים מצבא המלחמה
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> numbers 31:14
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And so, the question arises. Does BH contained a lock that prevents
>>>>>>> translation?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> fred burlingame
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> b-hebrew mailing list
>>>>>>> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
>>>>>>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> b-hebrew mailing list
>>>>>> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
>>>>>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> b-hebrew mailing list
>>>> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
>>>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> b-hebrew mailing list
>>> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
>>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>> b-hebrew mailing list
>> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page